Talk:Worsley/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Starting review.Pyrotec (talk) 20:26, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Initial review

Not at all bad for a "Start-class" article. Should make GA-class, although that [clarification] flag will need urgent attention; and, as per Eccles, Greater Manchester, we aught to have a "climate" section.

I have removed the clarification request and the uncertain text that lead to it. The source offers no more information that could help, so I've placed a request on the talk page just in case someone knows for sure. Parrot of Doom (talk) 21:24, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

I will put the article On Hold whilst these are addressed; but I will carry on with the review anyway.Pyrotec (talk) 20:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Climate data isn't available for the settlement per se, but a sentence could be added that Eccles has a similar climate to the rest of Greater Manchester and add some data from the Ringway weather station. Would that be enough? Nev1 (talk) 20:41, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes, OK by me.Pyrotec (talk) 20:45, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Done, on both articles. Nev1 (talk) 21:06, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

GA review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

A comprehnsive, wide-ranging article.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

This is possibly a good contender for WP:FAC. I don't particularly like the WP:lead, but its adequate and I'm awarding GA-status now. Congratulations on the article.Pyrotec (talk) 10:02, 18 April 2009 (UTC)